Embryology in a Scripture

By- Shabbir Ahmed

E mail : shabbirahmed2000@yahoo.com

Should there be any doubt on the knowledge of any Professor/Instructor on a subject that he teaches in a western institution? How can we doubt the knowledge of a western educated instructional faculty who possesses decades of teaching experience on the subject? Specially, we cannot disregard if the instructional faculty himself claims his proficiency on the subject with his long teaching experience. We cannot just ignore the claims of the expertise of such a faculty member. So, we pay heed to what he says in the area of his expertise. We expect him not to put forward his ideas based on his belief that needs no weak and/or strong proof. Because, any strong believer like Alef Mia of Burunga Mari or Kadam Ali of Shakiphur or Majid Mullah of Shariatphur believes in the existence of all possible theories in his religious scripture without any inquisitive analysis, argument, and proof. Many of these types of believers even do not know the meaning of the verses of their scripture. So, they think, propagate, and communicate by fully depending on their wishful beliefs. But, it is anticipated and expected that a western-educated learned expert (with the abilities to do rational analysis) would not prefer communicating anything only to satisfy his wishful belief and/or faith. But, the expert believers of a particular religion do not hesitate in this regard. To them, everything/anything they learn through non-religious education in non-religious schools must be established in their religious books. After all, they develop a logical mind through studies in secular institutions. How can they accept anything devoid of logic? Many of them are scientists/researchers/professors. So, they need logic to reinforce their belief/faith. On the contrary, belief/faith does not require any logical argument. The arguments are even discouraged in their scripture. It is rather encouraged to have belief with total submission. After total submission, how can an individual perform a logical analysis of the revelations in the scripture with an independent and inquisitive mind? In scientific and mathematical analysis, arguments on any concept are made repeatedly to relieve conflicts and/or contradictions.
Assumptions are made to contradict for proving the invalidity or validity of concepts. How can the believer scientists assume the invalidity to arrive at contradictions for subsequently proving the validity of a verse through “proof by contradiction?” Or, how can they assume the validity to arrive at contradictions for subsequently proving the invalidity of any primitive ruling through the same method? Don’t they really choose a conflicting/contradictory path in their attempt toward performing a logical analysis of the revelations written in primitive books?

There is no scope of writing unnecessary jargon for establishing any scientific fact. For example, to establish the science of embryology in a primitive book, one needs to show clearly the existence of scientific facts relevant to the complex processes of embryology. It does not bear any weight if the scientific facts are not mentioned with proper proofs and in-depth analysis. Is it possible to establish the science of embryology in the scripture only using the words “Alaqah,” and “Mudghah”? Is the embryology so simple to explain using one or two or three words? How many meanings of “Alaqah” would be necessary to establish the revelation of embryological science in the scripture? Prof. M. R. Uddin (NFB, June 1, 2001) tried to make the best possible use of the word “Alaqah” to describe different stages of the development of human embryo. His decades of teaching experience on embryology (as he revealed in one of his earlier writings) was probably quite helpful in providing information to the readers based on the words “Alaqah” and “Mudghah”, as mentioned in the scripture.
Surprisingly, he oversimplified the whole process. According o him the
Arabic word “Alaqah” has three meanings: (1) Leech, (2) suspended thing, and (3) Condensed clot. So, these three meanings in one word “Alaqah” describe the development of human embryo. Also, “Mudghah” meaning chewed substance further establishes his belief on the revelation in the scripture on human embryo. Does the embryo look like a chewed substance? Do leech, suspended thing, condensed clot, and chewed substance describe the science of human embryo?

He provided links to different figures illustrating the stages of the development of human embryo. One should know that all these figures of human embryo were not drawn after studying the scripture. Millions of Islamic scholars read and analyzed every word of the scripture in the past. Were they able to map the developing stages of embryo to come up with these diagrams? After all, if the embryological science were there in the scripture, then a number of Maolanas would definitely have come out as Embryologists because the learned Maolanas spend years in studying/analyzing the words of the scripture. It is the scientists (believers of different faiths and nonbelievers) who revealed these complex processes after a long time-consuming research endeavor. Now, the instructional faculty member of embryology is using all his expertise in establishing the mapping of the embryo through “Alaqa” and “Mudghah.” Does he teach his students the science of embryology using words from the scripture? Does he advise his students to use his scripture as a reference for understanding the scientific basis of modern embryology? If he does not do any of these in his professional life, then why does he try to establish the science of embryology in the scripture based only on his belief?

Mr. Syed Kamran Mirza gave some information on human embryological developments asking many real questions to Prof. M. R.Uddin in his recent (NFB, June 14, 2001) and earlier essays. It is expected that Prof. M. R. Uddin with his decades of experience in the field of embryology would come up with scientific facts to answer the questions of Mr. Mirza. It would be really good to know the truth. And the truth on the revelation of the embryological complex processes in the scripture must be established with scientifically correct information. As a scientist in the field of embryology, Prof. M. R. Uddin can really help us understand the existence of the science of embryology in the scripture by resolving all conflicts/questions/contradictions. As a submissive believer, one does not proceed to analyze with an inquisitive mind to prove or disprove anything to establish scientific facts in the scripture because he believes in the scripture with total submission without arguments or questions. Alef Mias, Kadam Alis, and Majid Mullahs fall in this category of submissive believers who do not have a minimum desire to analyze to establish the scientific facts in their scripture. It is their “belief” that all the information of the whole world is in their scripture. For their “belief” they do not need any proof. Unlike this class of submissive believers, Prof. M. R. Uddin tried to prove the scientific facts of embryology in the scripture. As a scientist with decades of experience in embryology, we expect him not to confuse using simple “word-meaning” approach but to answer and resolve by providing detailed scientifically correct embryological facts from the scripture.